鸭稻共育对稻田土壤养分含量及水稻茎秆抗倒伏性的影响
|
摘要
倒伏是水稻栽培中普遍存在的突出问题,发生倒伏不仅会导致减产,造成稻米品质下降,而且会影响收获作业效率和损失率,增加作业成本。水稻茎秆力学特性是决定水稻抗倒伏能力的重要因素之一。为研究鸭稻共育种植模式对水稻茎秆抗倒伏性的影响,通过对比鸭稻共育和常规插秧两种种植模式,分别测定了关键生育期稻田土壤的养分含量和水稻地上、地下部生物量;采用三点弯曲试验测试了水稻在幼穗形成期、抽穗期、黄熟期3个生长阶段的茎秆折断力,研究鸭稻共育种植模式对水稻抗倒伏性能的影响。结果表明:与常规插秧种植模式相比,在水稻灌浆期,鸭稻共育土壤的有机质、碱解氮、速效钾和速效磷含量分别增加26.07%、15.97%、41.24%和18.25%,水稻地上、地下部分生物量分别增加26.11%和29.88%,差异均达到显著性水平。在水稻幼穗形成期之前,两种种植模式水稻茎秆的倒伏指数差异不显著;在水稻幼穗形成期、抽穗期和黄熟期,鸭稻共育水稻茎秆的折断力比对照分别提高13.65%、33.51%和36.09%,倒伏指数分别降低4.86%、5.42%和8.16%,在抽穗期和黄熟期差异性显著。说明鸭稻共育在一定程度上可增强水稻茎秆的物理强度,提高水稻植株的抗倒伏能力。该研究为解决水稻倒伏问题提供了一定理论依据,为其他作物的抗倒伏研究提供方法借鉴。
Lodging is a common and prominent problem in rice cultivation. Lodging will not only lead to yield reduction and rice quality decline, but also affect harvesting efficiency and loss rate, and eventually increase operating cost. The mechanical properties of rice stem are one of the important factors that determine the lodging resistance of rice. In order to study the lodging resistance effect of rice stalks of duckrice farming mode, the nutrient contents in paddy soil, above-ground and underground biomass of rice were measured by comparing the two planting modes of duck rice co-breeding and conventional transplanting. Three point bending tests were used to test the stem breaking force of rice at key growth stages: young ear forming stage, heading stage and yellow ripening stage. The results showed the contents of organic matter, available nitrogen, available potassium and available phosphorus in the co-breeding soil of duck rice increased by 26.07%, 15.97%,41.24% and 18.25% that compared with the conventional transplanting mode, respectively. The biomass of above-ground and underground parts of rice increased by 26.11% and 29.88%, respectively, and the differences reached the significant level. There was no significant difference in stem lodging index between the two planting modes before the young ear formation stage. In the stage of young ear formation,heading and yellow ripening, the stem breaking force increased by 13.65%, 33.51% and 36.09% contrasting to the transplanting mode, and the lodging index decreased by 4.86%, 5.42% and 8.16%, respectively. The difference between heading stage and yellow ripening stage was significant. The results showed that rice-duck farming mode could enhance the physical strength of rice stem and the lodging resistance ability to some extent. This study provides a theoretical basis for solving the problem of lodging in rice and the reference for the research on lodging resistance of other crops.
Lodging is a common and prominent problem in rice cultivation. Lodging will not only lead to yield reduction and rice quality decline, but also affect harvesting efficiency and loss rate, and eventually increase operating cost. The mechanical properties of rice stem are one of the important factors that determine the lodging resistance of rice. In order to study the lodging resistance effect of rice stalks of duckrice farming mode, the nutrient contents in paddy soil, above-ground and underground biomass of rice were measured by comparing the two planting modes of duck rice co-breeding and conventional transplanting. Three point bending tests were used to test the stem breaking force of rice at key growth stages: young ear forming stage, heading stage and yellow ripening stage. The results showed the contents of organic matter, available nitrogen, available potassium and available phosphorus in the co-breeding soil of duck rice increased by 26.07%, 15.97%,41.24% and 18.25% that compared with the conventional transplanting mode, respectively. The biomass of above-ground and underground parts of rice increased by 26.11% and 29.88%, respectively, and the differences reached the significant level. There was no significant difference in stem lodging index between the two planting modes before the young ear formation stage. In the stage of young ear formation,heading and yellow ripening, the stem breaking force increased by 13.65%, 33.51% and 36.09% contrasting to the transplanting mode, and the lodging index decreased by 4.86%, 5.42% and 8.16%, respectively. The difference between heading stage and yellow ripening stage was significant. The results showed that rice-duck farming mode could enhance the physical strength of rice stem and the lodging resistance ability to some extent. This study provides a theoretical basis for solving the problem of lodging in rice and the reference for the research on lodging resistance of other crops.
引文
[1]王燚,魏中伟,邵平,等.水稻茎秆特性与抗倒伏关系的研究现状[J].湖北农业科学,2015,54(9):2054-2057.
[2]赵黎明,顾春梅,陈淑洁,等.水稻倒伏研究及其影响因素分析[J].北方水稻,2009,39(4):66-70.
[3]金正勋,郑冠龙,朱立楠,等.不同氮钾肥施用方法对水稻产量及抗倒伏性的影响[J].东北农业大学学报,2015,46(3):9-14.
[4]尹朝静.气候变化对中国水稻生产的影响研究[D].武汉:华中农业大学,2017.
[5]王士强,顾春梅,陈淑洁,等.水稻抗倒伏施肥技术研究进展[J].北方水稻,2009,39(6):70-74.
[6]赖上坤,陈春,赖尚科,等.水稻主要农艺性状和抗倒性的基因型差异及其相互关系[J].核农学报,2018,32(7):1256-1266.
[7]佟丽杰,王莉,冯玉娟,等.水稻倒伏及防控措施[J].北方水稻,2013(1):52-54.
[8]李国辉,钟旭华,田卡,等.施氮对水稻茎秆抗倒伏能力的影响及其形态和力学机理[J].中国农业科学,2013,46(7):1323-1334.
[9]张丰转,金正勋,马国辉,等.水稻抗倒性与茎秆形态性状和化学成分含量间相关分析[J].作物杂志,2010,137(4):15-19.
[10]申广勒,石英尧,黄艳玲,等.水稻抗倒伏特性及其与茎秆性状的相关性研究[J].中国农学通报,2007,23(12):58-62.
[11]江云珠,沈希宏,曹立勇.水稻茎秆性状的研究进展[J].中国稻米,2012,18(2):1-7.
[12]杨艳华,朱镇,张亚东,等.不同水稻品种(系)抗倒伏能力与茎秆形态性状的关系[J].江苏农业学报,2011,27(2):231-235.
[13]陈桂华,邓化冰,张桂莲,等.水稻茎秆性状与抗倒性的关系及配合力分析[J].中国农业科学,2016,49(3):407-417.
[14]张晶,石扬娟,任洁,等.硅肥用量对水稻茎秆抗折力的影响研究[J].中国农学通报,2014,30(3):49-55.
[15]罗茂春,田翠婷,李晓娟,等.水稻茎秆形态结构特征和化学成分与抗倒伏关系综述[J].西北植物学报,2007,27(11):2346-2353.
[16]张苗苗,宗良纲,谢桐洲.有机稻鸭共作对土壤养分动态变化和经济效益的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2010,18(2):256-260.
[17] TENG Q,HU XF,CHENG C,et al.Ecological effects of rice-duck integrated farming on soil fertility and weed and pest control[J].Journal of Soils and Sediments,2016,16:2395-2407.
[18]杨萍,詹文莲,徐鑫.稻田养鸭对水稻病虫草害的控制效果试验[J].通化师范学院学报(自然科学),2015,36(3):43-45.
[19]王献志.“稻鸭共育”对稻田病虫草害的控制效果分析[J].安徽农学通报,2016,22(1):37-39.
[20] JUNGHO SUH.Theory and reality of integrated rice-duck farming in Asian developing countries:A systematic review and SWOT analysis[J].Agricultural Systems,2014,125(3):74-81.
[21]黄兆祥,章家恩,梁开明,等.模拟鸭稻共作系统中鸭子机械刺激对水稻形态建成的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2012,20(6):717-722.
[22] SHAIKH TANVEER HOSSAIN,HIDEKI SUGIMOTO,GAZI JASHIM UDDIN AHMED.Effect of integrated rice-duck farmingon rice yield,farm productivity,andrice-provisioning ability of farmers[J].Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development,2005,2(1):79-86.
[23]冯尚宗,唐开平,王世伟,等.稻鸭共育生态栽培模式对有机水稻生长和产量的影响[J].浙江农业科学,2013(5):504-506.
[24] FU ZQ,HUANG H,LIAO XL,et al.Effect of ducks on CH4emission from paddy soils and its mechanism research in the riceduck ecosystem[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica,2008,28(5):2107-2114.
[25]展茗,曹凑贵,汪金平,等.鸭稻共作对甲烷排放的影响[J].应用生态学报,2008,19(12):2666-2672.
[26]任文涛,王岳,孔爱菊,等.稻田开放式自动化养鸭设备的研制及试验[J].农业工程学报,2016,32(5):70-75.
[27]孔爱菊,邬立岩,宋玉秋,等.稻田鸭舍喂水控制系统设计[J].沈阳农业大学学报,2015,46(5):618-623.
[28]孔爱菊,宋玉秋,邬立岩,等.稻田自动化鸭舍声训系统设计与试验研究[J].农机化研究,2016(8):169-172,236.
[29]白远飞,田飞,余顺波.稻田养鸭密度对水稻病虫草害及经济效益的影响[J].湖南农业科学,2014(19):20-23.
[30]孙兴全,陈捷,王秉丽,等.稻田养鸭密度及放养时间对稻田水层和土壤中“温室效应”气体的影响[J].安徽农学通报,2011,17(18):119-120.
[31]鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].2版.北京:中国农业出版社,2007:25-113.
[32]陈温福.北方水稻生产技术问答[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2004:6-27.
[33]赵琦,侯守贵,代贵金,等.辽宁北部中早熟水稻区高产高效栽培模式[J].北京农业,2014(15),31-32.
[34]禹盛苗,朱练峰,欧阳由男,等.稻鸭种养模式对稻田土壤理化性状、肥力因素及水稻产量的影响[J].土壤通报,2014,45(1):151-156.
[35]章家恩,许荣宝,全国明,等.鸭稻共作对水稻植株生长性状与产量性状的影响[J].资源科学,2011,33(6):1053-1059.
[36]梁玉刚,张文斗,谭长龙,等.鸭稻共作对水稻植株生长性状与产量性状的影响[J].华北农学报,2017,32(6):154-160.
[37]禹盛苗,欧阳由男,张秋英,等.稻鸭共育复合生态系统对水稻生长与产量的影响[J].应用生态学报,2005,16(7):1252-1256.
[2]赵黎明,顾春梅,陈淑洁,等.水稻倒伏研究及其影响因素分析[J].北方水稻,2009,39(4):66-70.
[3]金正勋,郑冠龙,朱立楠,等.不同氮钾肥施用方法对水稻产量及抗倒伏性的影响[J].东北农业大学学报,2015,46(3):9-14.
[4]尹朝静.气候变化对中国水稻生产的影响研究[D].武汉:华中农业大学,2017.
[5]王士强,顾春梅,陈淑洁,等.水稻抗倒伏施肥技术研究进展[J].北方水稻,2009,39(6):70-74.
[6]赖上坤,陈春,赖尚科,等.水稻主要农艺性状和抗倒性的基因型差异及其相互关系[J].核农学报,2018,32(7):1256-1266.
[7]佟丽杰,王莉,冯玉娟,等.水稻倒伏及防控措施[J].北方水稻,2013(1):52-54.
[8]李国辉,钟旭华,田卡,等.施氮对水稻茎秆抗倒伏能力的影响及其形态和力学机理[J].中国农业科学,2013,46(7):1323-1334.
[9]张丰转,金正勋,马国辉,等.水稻抗倒性与茎秆形态性状和化学成分含量间相关分析[J].作物杂志,2010,137(4):15-19.
[10]申广勒,石英尧,黄艳玲,等.水稻抗倒伏特性及其与茎秆性状的相关性研究[J].中国农学通报,2007,23(12):58-62.
[11]江云珠,沈希宏,曹立勇.水稻茎秆性状的研究进展[J].中国稻米,2012,18(2):1-7.
[12]杨艳华,朱镇,张亚东,等.不同水稻品种(系)抗倒伏能力与茎秆形态性状的关系[J].江苏农业学报,2011,27(2):231-235.
[13]陈桂华,邓化冰,张桂莲,等.水稻茎秆性状与抗倒性的关系及配合力分析[J].中国农业科学,2016,49(3):407-417.
[14]张晶,石扬娟,任洁,等.硅肥用量对水稻茎秆抗折力的影响研究[J].中国农学通报,2014,30(3):49-55.
[15]罗茂春,田翠婷,李晓娟,等.水稻茎秆形态结构特征和化学成分与抗倒伏关系综述[J].西北植物学报,2007,27(11):2346-2353.
[16]张苗苗,宗良纲,谢桐洲.有机稻鸭共作对土壤养分动态变化和经济效益的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2010,18(2):256-260.
[17] TENG Q,HU XF,CHENG C,et al.Ecological effects of rice-duck integrated farming on soil fertility and weed and pest control[J].Journal of Soils and Sediments,2016,16:2395-2407.
[18]杨萍,詹文莲,徐鑫.稻田养鸭对水稻病虫草害的控制效果试验[J].通化师范学院学报(自然科学),2015,36(3):43-45.
[19]王献志.“稻鸭共育”对稻田病虫草害的控制效果分析[J].安徽农学通报,2016,22(1):37-39.
[20] JUNGHO SUH.Theory and reality of integrated rice-duck farming in Asian developing countries:A systematic review and SWOT analysis[J].Agricultural Systems,2014,125(3):74-81.
[21]黄兆祥,章家恩,梁开明,等.模拟鸭稻共作系统中鸭子机械刺激对水稻形态建成的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2012,20(6):717-722.
[22] SHAIKH TANVEER HOSSAIN,HIDEKI SUGIMOTO,GAZI JASHIM UDDIN AHMED.Effect of integrated rice-duck farmingon rice yield,farm productivity,andrice-provisioning ability of farmers[J].Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development,2005,2(1):79-86.
[23]冯尚宗,唐开平,王世伟,等.稻鸭共育生态栽培模式对有机水稻生长和产量的影响[J].浙江农业科学,2013(5):504-506.
[24] FU ZQ,HUANG H,LIAO XL,et al.Effect of ducks on CH4emission from paddy soils and its mechanism research in the riceduck ecosystem[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica,2008,28(5):2107-2114.
[25]展茗,曹凑贵,汪金平,等.鸭稻共作对甲烷排放的影响[J].应用生态学报,2008,19(12):2666-2672.
[26]任文涛,王岳,孔爱菊,等.稻田开放式自动化养鸭设备的研制及试验[J].农业工程学报,2016,32(5):70-75.
[27]孔爱菊,邬立岩,宋玉秋,等.稻田鸭舍喂水控制系统设计[J].沈阳农业大学学报,2015,46(5):618-623.
[28]孔爱菊,宋玉秋,邬立岩,等.稻田自动化鸭舍声训系统设计与试验研究[J].农机化研究,2016(8):169-172,236.
[29]白远飞,田飞,余顺波.稻田养鸭密度对水稻病虫草害及经济效益的影响[J].湖南农业科学,2014(19):20-23.
[30]孙兴全,陈捷,王秉丽,等.稻田养鸭密度及放养时间对稻田水层和土壤中“温室效应”气体的影响[J].安徽农学通报,2011,17(18):119-120.
[31]鲍士旦.土壤农化分析[M].2版.北京:中国农业出版社,2007:25-113.
[32]陈温福.北方水稻生产技术问答[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2004:6-27.
[33]赵琦,侯守贵,代贵金,等.辽宁北部中早熟水稻区高产高效栽培模式[J].北京农业,2014(15),31-32.
[34]禹盛苗,朱练峰,欧阳由男,等.稻鸭种养模式对稻田土壤理化性状、肥力因素及水稻产量的影响[J].土壤通报,2014,45(1):151-156.
[35]章家恩,许荣宝,全国明,等.鸭稻共作对水稻植株生长性状与产量性状的影响[J].资源科学,2011,33(6):1053-1059.
[36]梁玉刚,张文斗,谭长龙,等.鸭稻共作对水稻植株生长性状与产量性状的影响[J].华北农学报,2017,32(6):154-160.
[37]禹盛苗,欧阳由男,张秋英,等.稻鸭共育复合生态系统对水稻生长与产量的影响[J].应用生态学报,2005,16(7):1252-1256.